Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Working Distance (was "85/2 vs 90/2")

Subject: [OM] Re: Working Distance (was "85/2 vs 90/2")
From: "Joel Wilcox" <jdubikins@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 19:02:19 -0500
From: "John A. Lind" <jlind@xxxxxxxxxxx> -- writ in part:
At 18:31 5/7/01, Joel Wilcox wrote:
Hi John,

Do you happen to know if your working distance using 135/2.8 with
extension is similar to using a 135/4.5?


---------- Short Answer ----------

Working distance would have to be approximately the same for the same
magnification because the focal length is the same

---------- Long Answer ----------
<snipped lots of amazing stuff>

Wow. Thanks.

I've got the Viv tubes. I'm not thinking about using the 135/2.8 on the notion that it would be faster but because the lens seems to me to be very good. Also, all being otherwise equal between the two, if the 135/4.5 allowed me to stay further away from the subject, I would find this to be a selling point. I don't do well stalking butterflies even with the 90/2.

I've had some good experience using the 300/4.5 with a little extension for close focus at a good working distance, but not handheld.

Joel W.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com


< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz